Lumia 1520 low light images

[BDBDBD]

I did numerous shots back to back with the 920 and the 1520. In low light, there is no comparison; the 920 blows away the 1520. The 1520 comes out not only darker but grainier as well. The same goes for low light video.

Where the 1520 is better is outdoor, bright light photography and also landscape photos. When taking distant city or mountain shots, the 1520 will have better focus details when zoomed in.

If I knew how to post pics side by side here, you could see the differences yourselves.

Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

 

[Shredcow]

Where your shots taken on auto or manual?

 

[BDBDBD]

Tried both auto and manual. With manual settings, you can improve a few things like the brightness of the photo, but you still get graininess in low light not to mention blurriness of anything that moves.

The worst was on video though as I don't think you can adjust exposure settings.

I simply think that the 1520's larger sensor cannot overcome the 920's larger aperture setting.

In fairness though, the 1520 does take better photos in daylight (sharper and more contrast)

Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

 

[Bahamen]

If I knew how to post pics side by side here, you could see the differences yourselves.

You could share them on flickr and post the link here?

 

[BDBDBD]

Here are 2 photos of the same spot using the 920 and the 1520. Both shot on Auto mode. The top one is the 920. The graininess of the 1520 can be seen if you enlarge the photos.

 

[JasonKruys]

Send a note to Nokia, including these photos!

Sent from my Lumia 1520 using Tapatalk

 

[Jarip]

Hmmmm, strange - how can Lumia 920 photo look sharper ? - is it possible to see original photos ?

 

[Dos101]

Here's a few pics I took with my 1520 last night at a pub:





I then took a picture of the same object with both the 920 and the 1520 (the 920 pic is on the left, 1520 pic is on the right):

 

[Bahamen]

I then took a picture of the same object with both the 920 and the 1520 (the 920 pic is on the left, 1520 pic is on the right):

Can you provide the EXIF data from the 920 image? Just wondering what was the shutter speed used to capture this.

 

[Kissanviikset]

The think is that 920 can soot almost twice lower ISO value compared to 1520 when using same shutter speed. When using auto settings on both devices 920 wins if light is really low. In those cases 1520 ISO value goes above 1600 and image quality takes very big hit and there is tons of noise and you can see visible dark lines in 1520 photos.

If you want take equally good pics as 920 you need to use manual settings. There's nothing wrong in 1520 low light images. It is just that 2.4f aperture that needs to raise ISO too much on auto settings. 1520 have great image stabilization and you can very well shoot with even 1 second shutter speeds. That compensates difference to 920 2.0f lens.

 

[Mark Reed2]

My issue is its a newer phone, by this I mean when you make a flagship phone its sets a standard (your best at that time) so when you come to make the next flagship phone you improve on the last one, be that cpu/screen/gpu/camera/battery.

With a new phone you would also hope a company learns from its mistakes in the past.......so why does the 1520 show signs of a step back.

 

[Dos101]

Can you provide the EXIF data from the 920 image? Just wondering what was the shutter speed used to capture this.

For sure.

For the 920
f-stop: f/2
exp. time: 1/4 sec
ISO: ISO-1600
exp. bias: 0 step
metering: average

For the 1520
f-stop: f/2.4
exp. time: 1/4 sec
ISO: ISO-1600
exp. bias: 0 step
metering: average

This info was pulled from the Details tab of the properties of both photos. I should also note that both pictures were taken using the Nokia Camera app with everything on default settings (save for flash/focus assist being off).

 

[Shredcow]

Does anyone know how much brighter, in terms of exposure, is f/2 compared to f/2.4?

 

[Bahamen]

Does anyone know how much brighter, in terms of exposure, is f/2 compared to f/2.4?

It will be the ratio of the f numbers, squared. In this case, 44% more for the f/2. The relative sensor area can also be measured in similar way, if the sensor size is measured by inch (") you will need to square it. It may vary slightly depending on the aspect ratio of the sensor.

 

[Bahamen]

For sure.

For the 920
f-stop: f/2
exp. time: 1/4 sec
ISO: ISO-1600
exp. bias: 0 step
metering: average

For the 1520
f-stop: f/2.4
exp. time: 1/4 sec
ISO: ISO-1600
exp. bias: 0 step
metering: average

This info was pulled from the Details tab of the properties of both photos. I should also note that both pictures were taken using the Nokia Camera app with everything on default settings (save for flash/focus assist being off).

The 920 generally tends to over-expose all lowlight shots, therefore to compare the image quality you need to increase the 1520's exposure (manually). Of course this will result in more noise but this is necessary to assess the impact of sensor versus lens. The other thing is we need to compare the 920 at full resolution. My guess is that the 1520 at oversampled 5mp still has an advantage at pixel level.

 

[maverick786us]

My issue is its a newer phone, by this I mean when you make a flagship phone its sets a standard (your best at that time) so when you come to make the next flagship phone you improve on the last one, be that cpu/screen/gpu/camera/battery.

With a new phone you would also hope a company learns from its mistakes in the past.......so why does the 1520 show signs of a step back.

You made a good point. Lumia 920 is an excellent device. With minor issue of heat, random battery draining, low speaker volume and its camera taking soft images under normal lightening conditions. I am not sure if Nokia will fix this issue with a firmware update. Because it is more than an year old flagship device.

Lumia 1520 which is a generation ahead of 920, despite its not a flagship device or a successor of 920. It is like a big brother of 920. Nokia should have overcome the limitations posed by 920. But instead of that, they downgraded it by reducing the size of lens, aperture, thus producing horrible low light phots and videos.

Everyone doesn't like to oversample images to 5MP. I think their oversampled iamges should have been 8MP instead of 5. Is it something hardware base or an upcoming firmware can provide the option of oversample in 8MP as well as 5?

 

[Shredcow]

I actually think the 1520 is a step ahead of the 920. The 1520's 5mpx output can match the 920's 8mpx; the 1520's larger sensor and oversampling technology does provide a much higher quality image.

Granted, the 1520 suffers from some bugs. And I'm not surprised - after all, the 1520 is a brand new lens assembly.

The 920 has been out for a long time now so Nokia has had a lot of time to tweak it. Remember the Amber update that made every photo turn out a bit more green/yellow? How about the softness issue before Amber corrected it?

Given Nokia's track record and emphasis on photography, I'm sure Nokia will fix the few issues with the 1520.

 

[maverick786us]

I actually think the 1520 is a step ahead of the 920. The 1520's 5mpx output can match the 920's 8mpx; the 1520's larger sensor and oversampling technology does provide a much higher quality image.

Granted, the 1520 suffers from some bugs. And I'm not surprised - after all, the 1520 is a brand new lens assembly.

The 920 has been out for a long time now so Nokia has had a lot of time to tweak it. Remember the Amber update that made every photo turn out a bit more green/yellow? How about the softness issue before Amber corrected it?

Given Nokia's track record and emphasis on photography, I'm sure Nokia will fix the few issues with the 1520.

But even after Nokia Black update, people have complained about softness issue under normal lightening conditions, and acknowledge that Nokia is ignore its 1 yr old flagship device, because of its total focus on new devices.

 

[SlightlyDum]

I own both 920 and 1520. Personally, I do believe the 920 takes better low light pictures but the 1520 isn't that far behind and in most cases it isn't noticeable. The one reason I prefer 1520 is DNG editing... I know a lot of people don't won't to have to do post work on their photos but you could get rid of most of the noise issue and adjust white balance a lot easier and better than the 920.... Making a much more flawless photo.

 

[Bahamen]

Everyone doesn't like to oversample images to 5MP. I think their oversampled iamges should have been 8MP instead of 5. Is it something hardware base or an upcoming firmware can provide the option of oversample in 8MP as well as 5?

Despite the lower resolution the 5MP image still retains a very good amount of detail and has much cleaner output. When using the 808 I was almost exclusively shooting at 2MP and even then it was more than good enough for viewing at full screen with near noise-free image.

I believe the ProShot camera app allows you to select different resolution options. In any case you can always save the RAW and downsample to whatever resolution that you want.